Similarity of stress distribution in bone for various implant surface roughness heights of similar form

Clinical implant dentistry and related research

Volumn 2, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 225-230

  Skalak, Richard ^a   Zhao, Yihua ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; BONE; BONE REGENERATION; ELASTICITY; HUMAN; MECHANICAL STRESS; PHYSIOLOGY; SURFACE PROPERTY; TOOTH IMPLANTATION; TOOTH PROSTHESIS; ULTRASTRUCTURE;

ALGORITHMS; BONE AND BONES; DENTAL IMPLANTS; DENTAL PROSTHESIS DESIGN; DENTAL PROSTHESIS RETENTION; ELASTICITY; HUMANS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; OSSEOINTEGRATION; STRESS, MECHANICAL; SURFACE PROPERTIES;

EID: 0034574825     PISSN: 15230899     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1708-8208.2000.tb00121.x     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. 1 Fuji T, Fujiwara K, Mirata Y, et al. In vivo evaluation of fixation of metal implants coated by melt‐sprayed alumina: experiments in rabbit. Med J Osaka Univ 1991 ; 40: 19–28.
2. 2 Hansson S. Towards an optimized dental implant and implant bridge design: a biomedical approach. Doctoral thesis, Chalmers University of Technology, Göteborg, 1997.
3. 3 Hansson S, Norton M. The relation between surface roughness and interfacial shear strength for bone‐anchored implants. A mathematical model. J Biomech 1999 ; 32: 829–836.
4. 4 Wang C‐T. Applied elasticity. New York McGraw‐Hill, 1953.
5. 5 Skalak R, Zhao Y. Interaction of force‐fitting and surface roughness of implants. Clin Implant Dent Relat Res 2000 ; 4: 219–224.
6. 6 Brånemark R, Ohrnell LO, Nilsson P, Thomsen P. Biomechanical characterization of osseointegration during healing: an experimental in vivo study in the rat. Biomaterials 1997 ; 18: 969–978.
7. 7 Brånemark R, Ohrnell LO, Skalak R, et al. Biomechanical characterization of osseointegration: an experimental in vivo investigation in the beagle dog. J Orthop Res 1998 ; 16: 61–69.
8. 8 Brånemark R, Skalak R. An in vivo method for biomechanical characterization of bone‐anchored implants. Med Eng Phys 1998 ; 20: 216–219.
9. 9 Sennerby L, Ericson LE, Thomsen P, et al. Structure of the bone‐titanium interface in retrieved clinical oral implants. Clin Oral Impl Res 1991 ; 2: 103–111.
10. 10 Sennerby L, Thomsen P, Ericson LE. Ultrastructure of the bone‐titanium interface in rabbits. J Mater Sci Mater Med 1992 ; 3: 262–271.
11. 11 Sennerby L, Thomsen P, Ericson LE. Early tissue response to titanium implants inserted in rabbit cortical bone. Part II: ultrastructural observations. J Mater Sci Mater Med 1993 ; 4: 494–502.
12. 12 Larsson C. The interface between bone and metals with different surface properties: light microscopic and ultrastructural studies. Doctoral thesis, Göteborg University, Göteborg, 1997.